Author
Topic: Is it worth picking up the 1D-X? (Read 14712 times)

I was very excited at the announcement of the 1D-X and I quickly put a preorder in, but I admit that I am now having second thoughts.

First, I am not a professional photographer by trade. I do take a lot of real estate photography - which pays for my equipment. For real estate I use a TS-E 24 II, TS-E 17, and occasionally a TS-E 90. From a pro standpoint therefore the AF doesn't do anything for me. The 7 shot bracketing is nice, but I can get by counting like I do today.

In terms of my hobby work, I primarily shoot nature and insects. My primary lenses for this are the MP-E 65, TS-E 90, 100/2.8 macro IS, TS-E 24 II, and 70-200/2.8 II. In almost all cases - even with the 70-200 - I shoot in MF. Therefore, for this scenario the AF doesn't matter much. The better viewfinder though will be very nice.

I currently shoot all of these with a 5D2. The biggest improvement the 1D-X will give me is high ISO. However with rumors of a high ISO 5D3 coming out sometime (probably EOY 2012) that would probably suit my needs as well as a 1D-X (if it truly uses the same sensor).

The one area where I do need AF is sports. In spring my two sons play baseball and for that I use a 7D + 300/4 and 70-200/2.8 II. As they play during the daytime the light is usually quite good and the 7D does a very good job. Otherwise I tend not to use my 7D as the high ISO sucks.

Finally I take a great number of photos travelling. For this scenario I take both the 5D2 and 7D and often have both cameras out at the same time. I typically put the 70-200/2.8 II on the 7D and the TS-E 24 II on the 5D2. If I go through with the 1D-X I would carry only that camera as I would sell the 7D + 5D2. For examples of places traveled to we did Uzbekistan+Tajikistan this year and have trips booked to Dubai and Tuscany next year.

The biggest argument for the 1D-X is I typically push ISO when travelling and taking hand held macro shots. The improved ISO would greatly help here, as would the better viewfinder. On the other hand, if I am patient enough to wait for a high ISO 5D3 then that should work just as well.

Generally I have always pushed buying glass over buying cameras, but I almost have the glass I want. The only lenses I really want are the 8-15 fisheye (which I will buy in March whether I pick up the 1D-X or not) and a good telephoto. The problem is for the $4000 I would save by not picking up the 1D-X now (rest of the money comes from sale of 5D2 + 7D) there really isn't a decent telephoto out there. The ideal lens would be the new 200-400/1.4x, 400/2.8 II, or 600/4 II but all of those are well beyond the budget. Of course I could always just keep saving until I do have enough.

I find myself therefore a bit conflicted. On the one hand a 1 series camera has always been a bit of a 'holy grail' to me and I have always wanted one. On the other hand I am not sure it is truly worth the expense.

"Worth the expense"--worth is it's value to you, which we cannot define, and relative expense is hard to determine without having your financial statement in front of us. If you need (or want) a body that does more than one you currently have and have the funds for it, then go for it.

At this point the 5d3 is completely theoretical, so trying to compare the two is not doable. You can certainly hedge your bet by not pre-ordering the 1DX with the hopes that the 5d3 will at least be announced before the 1DX comes to market and you can then make an informed decision between the two. But this is at the risk of "going to the back of the line" for the 1DX.

I do have the funds for the 1D-X but I am debating given my current needs is it the wisest use of funds? I am currently leaning towards keeping my preorder, but I do find myself debating whether a used 400/2.8 or 500/4 would be a wiser use of the funds. Alternately I could pick up more lighting.

That is really what I am comparing the 1D-X against. The improvements the 1D-X will offer to my current photography vs. the utility of other uses for the funds.

jhubson1

Personally I would say the best investment would be to pick up the 500mm. I have traveled quite a bit and the lens is amazing not only in quality but also that it can be taken with pretty easily. I dedicated one side of a lowepro flipside 400 and also have many other lenses in it as well. If you are getting good shots with what you currently own there is no need for an upgrade unless necessary. On the contrary a telephoto is essential...prior to my ownership of the 500mm I used the 100-400mm and the difference is like night and day. I have also used everything from a 40D up to a 1D Mark IV...I will say that the 1D is a beast but was able to obtain excellent shots from every camera...really depends on what you require.

Is it worthed? Only you can answer that question depending on your need, but I think it is. You mention the "importance" for you of the high ISO performance. In regards to the 5D III, there is no guarantee it will have the same ISO performance. I would doubt it but as was mentionned before, the 5D III is very much theoritical right now. Maybe in January the rumors will give us more, but we still dont know what sensor the 5D III will use.

So if the 1DX is within your budget, I think it will be a great machine. !

handsomerob

AF and burst speed of 1Dx are among its best features. Those features increase price beyond levels most people can't afford. You will be paying an incredible price premium and if you will not benefit from these features on a daily basis, I would say that you could better hold on to your 5DII + 7D.

5DII seems to be great for your kind of work and sports you got covered with great glass and a nice 1.6x crop body.

1Dx on the other hand is a beast. Offers the best of both worlds; great IQ/high ISO. Fast and reliable. It's a dream camera for many photographers. I'm pretty sure that you will fall in love with it and will see other cameras as primitive objects once you used it. But everything has a price, of course

So, do you want to pay for features you don't really need? Like others said, no one but you can answer this for you. You need to check what you need and what you don't.

There are also a lot of people who don't want to carry around the bulk of a 1D each time they go out, so they opt for smaller/normal sized bodies. I don't know how much this is important to you.

That said, here is another idea: Since you are fortune enough to have the funds for the 1Dx, you could always just buy it and start testing (and enjoying) it's great high ISO performance. Then, by the time the 5DIII is finally released, you could reconsider if you want to keep it or trade for a 5DIII. You shouldn't lose much money, if any at all, because the demand will still be very very high for the 1Dx when 5DIII is released next year.

canon rumors FORUM

Brad_Randmark

When I worked at a bicycle shop, I sold $300 bikes all summer to save up money to buy a $5000 dollar bike. A $5000 bike is never 'worth it' - it is the only bike you are willing to except. As someone with limited funds on the waiting list for the 1D X, I can tell you that it is not a choice. I will work two jobs until I can walk into Calumet with $7000.

Is the 1D X worth it? To me, yes. I have a 5DII and need better AF, want to stay FF, need at least native ISO 3200, and want a higher frame rate. That rules out any current body. I'm not willing to wait an indeterminate amount of time in the hope (perhaps a vain hope) that Canon improves the 5-series AF enough to make a real difference. So, the 1D X is the right body. Would I like it to have way more MP (but no more noise), slower base fps, and a crop mode with fast fps and sufficient MP to match the 1DIV, or better yet, the 7D. Sure - then it could replace both 5DII and 7D. But it can't. However, as an upgrade from my 5DII it's pretty close to perfect.

Unless there is a FF that comes out with the FPS of the 7D, the 7D's AF or a little better, and ISO close to what the 1DX is supposed to offer, I'll be buying the 1DX; maybe not the minute it comes out, but within six months of its release (in time for next fall). One of my passions is shooting my kids sports and in particular their hockey and the majority of arenas I shoot in have dismal lighting (there's a couple I don't even both in) and while it's not terrible, the noise at 3200 (1/500, 2.8 ) is certainly noticeably. Heck if what they are saying about the 1DX comes to fruition I'd be able to shoot at 6400/12800 without concern. I'm really looking forward to the hands on reviews and actual image analysis and tests to see where the 1DX is at.

@kirispupis: Here's another perspective, from someone who's a weekend warrior but running around with a 1D4...

As a former owner of the 5D2, I have to say that one thing u miss is the size compared to the 1D series. When I got the 1D4 (and now w/o the 5D2), I'm forced to carry a pro-size body around all the time - regardless of whether I'm shooting a neighborhood event or traveling to other countries. Back when I had the 5D2, I could choose whether I want the full setup (battery x2, grip, and others) or just camera+lens basics.

Now, since you own both 5D2 and 7D, you can choose to bring one or two cameras with you when going abroad (and whatever battery pack/grip combo you prefer). The good thing for you is you have 2 DSLRs - that's much more insurance than 1 camera - even a 1D. Of course, the advantage of the 1D is it's more rugged, but again, I don't have a backup if anything else happens (I don't consider DCs a backup since the photo quality is not in the same league as DSLR).

Regardless, I think you can trust the 1DX to meet expectations for a full-frame rugged camera, but if you replace your current setup with it, you will lose some of the flexibilities of two compatible bodies. So you might want to give it some thoughts.

PS: You might have to reconfigure your bags, especially ones that carry standard bodies which are not "deep" enough for pro-bodies.

Thank you for all of the advice. I am still leaning towards keeping my preorder, but given the amount of money in question I do want to make sure the decision is worth it. The main reason I am leaning towards this is the 1D-X helps in all aspects of my photography - while a telephoto only helps for certain types of pictures.

Some answers to a few of the questions.

- In terms of size, I am aware how large the camera is as I have used a 1Ds3 and a 1D4 before. I have a ThinkTankPhoto Airport Accelerator 2 that I bring with me almost everywhere. I expect it to not have a problem with the 1D-X and my bag will be a bit less packed because I am replacing 2 cameras with 1.

- I do lose some flexibility going from two cameras to one. In the future I may rectify that (particularly if the 5D3 is high MP) but in the meantime I do have an X10 when I don't want to lug everything around. Also, I had a single camera for a long time before picking up the 7D, so I can manage. My wife, on the other hand, will be very happy that I only have a single camera as she had a hard time being seen with me...

- I preordered the camera at Adorama. They are accepting preorders and I put mine in a few hours after they reopened after the holidays. I have had good luck preordering with them before and I should receive the camera relatively early.

Orion

I would just like to add that if you are a professional photographer with studio strobes, do weddings, other events etc, you probably have some mean cameras as it is, so my advice would be to wait and rent one for the weekend . . test it out, and then make your decision. It's a great camera, and shuld aid you better than the one you have now, but it is not going to save your business etc. Wait a year after it is released, and in the mean time by a prime lense with f/1.2+

If you already have 2 camera bodies, consider selling one (and possibly a lense you don't use as much) and use the money towards the 1Dx later. ALso if you wait you can add on a rebate later, if offered. . .